ment of what is just and right. Sometimes they have acted wisely, sometimes they have acted unwisely; sometimes they have failed to act at all. But in every case the full responsibility has been with them. There has been a steady advance in the fidelity and efficiency with which the jury has done its work; and during the last two years they have done all that the strictest faculty would, and more than any faculty could have done, to maintain the good order and elevate the standard of conduct in and about the college grounds.

The reformation of individual students can be done better by personal influence of president and professor than by formal faculty action. An unofficial letter of advice and warning to parents, a friendly talk with the student himself, is much more effective than a scale of fines, demerits, rustications, suspensions, probations, special probations, and expulsions.

If a student fails to respond to this personal appeal, he should be removed as quietly as possible at the first convenient season, in a way that will least attract the attention of the outside world, least hurt the feelings of parents and friends, and most kindly and firmly impress upon the student the fact that he and not the college is to blame for the severing of their connection.

The assumption with reference to students should be not that they are criminals, to be properly punished for every crime they commit; but that they are thoughtless and immature persons, who often need advice and warning and reproof; who, as a rule, mean to do right, and can be much more efficiently controlled by good will and patience than by wrath and vengeance.

In a word, the government of a small college should be that of a large family; the welfare of the students, collective and individual, should be its single aim; and the fewest rules and the slightest penalties and the least display of authority that will accomplish these ends is the ideal of college govern

ment.

The spirit and tone of the college should be in the broadest sense of the term religious.

It is simply inconceivable that young men between seventeen and twenty-five should be content with the mere doing of the particular tasks assigned them from day to day, regardless of the wider relations and deeper meaning of their lives. This hunger and thirst for adjustment to a larger and higher sphere of being may be met in either of two ways.

The student may go into society, acquire the ways of the world, and by gaining entrance to the circles of the cultured, and finding favor in the eyes of the fair, attain the conviction that he belongs to the great and glorious order of things, and that all is well with him. His accomplishments and popularity secure him considerable advantage in getting a start in life, and he easily becomes a typical man of the world. He lacks depth, sincerity, and inward strength, and is not sure to stand the strain of disappointment and temptation in later years.

The tendency of life in large colleges near great cities is somewhat in this direction. The small college in the country town does not present in such bewitching guise the attractions of social life. And so the student's mind may more easily be led beyond the artificial, local, and temporal aspects of life, out into meditation and communion with the universal and eternal. The student thus trained may lack some of the accomplishments and miss some of the opportunities of his urban brother; but he has formed fixed ideals of character and principles of conduct. He is rooted and grounded in reality, and his confidence is in God and his own right arm.

The maintenance of this religious tone and spirit, which is manly because it is godly, and is superior to the shocks of time and fortune because it is rooted and grounded in eternity and God, should be the distinctive and crowning glory of the small college.

For combining sound scholarship with solid character; for making men both intellectually and spiritually free; for unit

ing the pursuit of truth with reverence for duty, the small college, open to the worthy graduates of every good high school, presenting a course sufficiently rigid to give symmetrical development, and sufficiently elastic to encourage individuality along congenial lines, taught by professors who are men first and scholars afterward, governed by kindly personal influence, and secluded from too frequent contact with social distractions, has a mission which no change of educational conditions can take away, and a policy which no sentiment of vanity or jealousy should be permitted to turn aside.

WILLIAM DE WITT HYDE.

BOWDOIN COLLEGE,

BRUNSWICK, ME.

II.

THE LITERATURE OF EDUCATION.

The literature of education might be divided into literature pertaining to the history of education, literature pertaining to principles of education, literature pertaining to methods of instruction, and literature consisting of books whose chief aim is to direct the moral purpose and arouse the enthusiasm of the teacher. For practical purposes, however, it is extremely difficult to establish any such classification as the foregoing. Methods are deductions from principles, and principles of education are deductions from so many sciences, as well as from the history of education, that it cannot be said of any one book that it is exclusively devoted to principles or to methods; while the history of education, as I shall attempt to show, is best gleaned, not from the text-books on the subject, but from books of many different characters, produced at far distant periods and under the most diverse conditions. The order that exists in the literature of education is not the order of bricks in a wall, but the order of the boughs and the foliage of

a tree.

That the ordinary text-books studied in our normal schools do not supply all that is necessary for the thorough equipment of the teacher is only too apparent. Take, for instance, the history of education. This subject has been made a part of the course of study in every State normal school, in every city training school for teachers, in every college department of pedagogy. It is justly claimed for the history of education that, when properly studied, it results in culture of the highest kind by generating a realizing sense of the great things accomplished by the human race; that it imparts an exalted idea of the teacher's profession through inciting reverence for the great teachers who have left their impress on mankind; that it shows us what to avoid by exhibiting the experiments

that have been tried in the balance of experience and found wanting; and that it displays before us principles and methods the efficacy of which has been demonstrated by the accumulated testimony of ages. Are these claims sustained in practice? In every school are found teachers that are supposed to have made a study of the history of education, who are not imbued with reverence for the great professors of the teaching art; who day after day commit the very mistakes that have been demonstrated a thousand times to be mistakes; and who are devoid of any realizing sense of the principles that were long since enrolled among the eternal verities. In spite of their study of the history of education, many teachers still build their houses, so to speak, on the sand and not on the rocks.

Indeed, the question may well be asked: Are we, in any proper sense of the term, teaching the history of education? What is it we do? We place in the hands of our pupils a little text-book on the subject, and tell them to study that. It consists of brief biographical sketches of great teachers, brief accounts of the schools they founded or conducted and the works they wrote, and a summary of the principles of education they are supposed to have established. Pupil teachers memorize names, and dates, and lists of principles, which they proceed to forget with the utmost alacrity as soon. as the graduating examination is concluded. And this is all that comes to the average teacher from studying the history of education-the merest shell, from which the kernel has been lost.

The case is exactly paralleled in the history of the teaching of English literature. When English literature first became a subject of school study, no better plan was found than to set children to memorizing the names of authors, the works they had written, and criticisms upon these works; and thus the most delightful of all studies is to this day often made a mere weariness of the flesh. And so with the history of education. We read about the great teachers instead of reading what they have written. Criticisms upon their lives and writ